Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Make Most of Text Search
  1. Checkout this video tutorial: How to search effectively on TaxTMI.
  2. Put words in double quotes for exact word search, eg: "income tax"
  3. Avoid noise words such as : 'and, of, the, a'
  4. Sort by Relevance to get the most relevant document.
  5. Press Enter to add multiple terms/multiple phrases, and then click on Search to Search.
  6. Text Search
  7. The system will try to fetch results that contains ALL your words.
  8. Once you add keywords, you'll see a new 'Search In' filter that makes your results even more precise.
  9. Text Search
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
❮❮ Hide
Default View
Expand ❯❯
Close ✕
🔎 Case Laws - Adv. Search
TEXT SEARCH:

Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search

Search In:
Main Text + AI Text
  • Main Text
  • Main Text + AI Text
  • AI Text
  • Title Only
  • Head Notes
  • Citation
Party Name: ?
Party name / Appeal No.
Law:
---- All Laws----
  • ---- All Laws----
  • GST
  • Income Tax
  • Benami Property
  • Customs
  • Corporate Laws
  • Securities / SEBI
  • Insolvency & Bankruptcy
  • FEMA
  • Law of Competition
  • PMLA
  • Service Tax
  • Central Excise
  • CST, VAT & Sales Tax
  • Wealth tax
  • Indian Laws
Courts: ?
Select Court or Tribunal
---- All Courts ----
  • ---- All Courts ----
  • Supreme Court - All
  • Supreme Court
  • SC Orders / Highlights
  • High Court
  • Appellate Tribunal
  • Tribunal
  • Appellate authority for Advance Ruling
  • Advance Ruling Authority
  • National Financial Reporting Authority
  • Competition Commission of India
  • ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY
  • Commission
  • Central Government
  • Board
  • DISTRICT/ SESSIONS Court
  • Commissioner / Appellate Authority
  • Other
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court
Landmark: ?
Where case is referred in other cases
---- All Cases ----
  • ---- All Cases ----
  • Referred in >= 3 Cases
  • Referred in >= 4 Cases
  • Referred in >= 5 Cases
  • Referred in >= 10 Cases
  • Referred in >= 15 Cases
  • Referred in >= 25 Cases
  • Referred in >= 50 Cases
  • Referred in >= 100 Cases
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:
TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 2025
  • 2024
  • 2023
  • 2022
  • 2021
  • 2020
  • 2019
  • 2018
  • 2017
  • 2016
  • 2015
  • 2014
  • 2013
  • 2012
  • 2011
  • 2010
  • 2009
  • 2008
  • 2007
  • 2006
  • 2005
  • 2004
  • 2003
  • 2002
  • 2001
  • 2000
  • 1999
  • 1998
  • 1997
  • 1996
  • 1995
  • 1994
  • 1993
  • 1992
  • 1991
  • 1990
  • 1989
  • 1988
  • 1987
  • 1986
  • 1985
  • 1984
  • 1983
  • 1982
  • 1981
  • 1980
  • 1979
  • 1978
  • 1977
  • 1976
  • 1975
  • 1974
  • 1973
  • 1972
  • 1971
  • 1970
  • 1969
  • 1968
  • 1967
  • 1966
  • 1965
  • 1964
  • 1963
  • 1962
  • 1961
  • 1960
  • 1959
  • 1958
  • 1957
  • 1956
  • 1955
  • 1954
  • 1953
  • 1952
  • 1951
  • 1950
  • 1949
  • 1948
  • 1947
  • 1946
  • 1945
  • 1944
  • 1943
  • 1942
  • 1941
  • 1940
  • 1939
  • 1938
  • 1937
  • 1936
  • 1935
  • 1934
  • 1933
  • 1932
  • 1931
  • 1930
Volume
  • Volume
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
TMI
Example : 2024 (6) TMI 204
By Case ID:

When case Id is present, search is done only for this

Sort By:
RelevanceDefaultDate
    No Records Found
    ❯❯
    MaximizeMaximizeMaximize
    0 / 200
    Expand Note
    Add to Folder

    No Folders have been created

      +

      Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?

      NOTE:

      Case Laws
      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Results Found:
      AI TextQuick Glance by AIHeadnote
      Show All SummariesHide All Summaries
      No Records Found

      Case Laws

      Back

      All Case Laws

      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Showing
      Records
      ExpandCollapse
        No Records Found

        Case Laws

        Back

        All Case Laws

        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :

        📋
        Contents
        Note

        Note

        -

        Bookmark

        print

        Print

        Login to TaxTMI
        Verification Pending

        The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on

        Didn't receive the mail? Resend Mail

        Don't have an account? Register Here

        <h1>Election appeal dismissed, candidate's win overturned for vote tampering. Legal costs awarded.</h1> <h3>S. RAGHBIR SINGH GILL Versus S. GURCHARAN SINGH TOHRA</h3> The appeal was dismissed, and the election of the returned candidate was set aside due to improper reception of votes and tampering with postal ballot ... - Issues Involved:1. Noncompliance with the Representation of the People Act, 1951, and associated rules.2. Improper reception of votes.3. Commission of corrupt practices.4. Secrecy of ballot under Section 94 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951.5. Tampering with postal ballot papers.6. Interpretation of Section 94 in the context of free and fair elections.7. Grounds for declaring the election void under Section 100 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951.Issue-Wise Detailed Analysis:1. Noncompliance with the Representation of the People Act, 1951, and associated rules:The election petitioners contended that the election of the appellant was materially affected by noncompliance with the provisions of the Representation of the People Act, 1951, and the rules made thereunder. The High Court found that the tampering of four postal ballot papers was a significant noncompliance that impacted the election results.2. Improper reception of votes:The election petitioners alleged that four postal ballot papers were tampered with to favor the appellant, which constituted improper reception of votes. The High Court held that these four votes were improperly received in favor of the returned candidate and improperly refused to the unsuccessful Akali candidate, which materially affected the election result.3. Commission of corrupt practices:The petitioners alleged corrupt practices by the appellant and his agent, including obtaining assistance from persons in the service of the Punjab Government. However, the High Court found that the allegations of corrupt practices were not proved and decided this issue in favor of the returned candidate.4. Secrecy of ballot under Section 94 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951:The appellant argued that Section 94 of the Act, which ensures the secrecy of the ballot, was violated by allowing witnesses to disclose for whom they voted. The Court interpreted Section 94 as a privilege for the voter, which can be waived by the voter if they choose to disclose their vote voluntarily. The Court held that the privilege ends when the voter voluntarily discloses their vote, and there is no violation of Section 94.5. Tampering with postal ballot papers:The High Court found that four postal ballot papers were tampered with to alter the first preference votes from the Akali candidate to the appellant. This finding was based on the testimony of witnesses and expert evidence. The tampering was crude and evident, leading to the conclusion that the votes were improperly received in favor of the appellant.6. Interpretation of Section 94 in the context of free and fair elections:The Court emphasized that secrecy of ballot is an indispensable adjunct of free and fair elections but must yield to the larger principle of ensuring free and fair elections. The Court held that Section 94 enacts a qualified privilege in favor of the voter, which can be waived by the voter to ensure the integrity of the election process.7. Grounds for declaring the election void under Section 100 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951:The Court held that the improper reception of votes and the tampering of postal ballot papers fell within the grounds for declaring the election void under Section 100(1)(d)(iii) of the Act. The Court found that the result of the election was materially affected by the improper reception and refusal of votes, leading to the setting aside of the appellant's election and declaring the unsuccessful Akali candidate elected.Conclusion:The appeal was dismissed, and the election of the returned candidate was set aside based on the findings of improper reception of votes, tampering with postal ballot papers, and the interpretation of Section 94 in the context of ensuring free and fair elections. The unsuccessful Akali candidate was declared elected, and the costs were awarded to the respondents.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found